linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] cxl/mem: Move some definitions to mem.h

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210414102115.00001f09@Huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 14 Apr 2021 10:21:15 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC:     <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>, Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux ACPI" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Weiny, Ira" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        "Vishal L Verma" <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        "Schofield, Alison" <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
        Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>,
        "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] cxl/mem: Move some definitions to mem.h

On Tue, 13 Apr 2021 17:42:37 -0700
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 5:18 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 10:47 AM Jonathan Cameron
> > <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com> wrote:  
> > >
> > > On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 07:30:47 -0700
> > > Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> > >  
> > > > In preparation for sharing cxl.h with other generic CXL consumers,
> > > > move / consolidate some of the memory device specifics to mem.h.
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>  
> > >
> > > Hi Dan,
> > >
> > > Would be good to see something in this patch description saying
> > > why you chose to have mem.h rather than push the defines down
> > > into mem.c (which from the current code + patch set looks like
> > > the more logical thing to do).  
> >
> > The main motivation was least privilege access to memory-device
> > details, so they had to move out of cxl.h. As to why move them in to a
> > new mem.h instead of piling more into mem.c that's just a personal
> > organizational style choice to aid review. I tend to go to headers
> > first and read data structure definitions before reading the
> > implementation, and having that all in one place is cleaner than
> > interspersed with implementation details in the C code. It's all still
> > private to drivers/cxl/ so I don't see any "least privilege" concerns
> > with moving it there.
> >
> > Does that satisfy your concern?
> >
> > If yes, I'll add the above to v3.  
> 
> Oh, another thing it helps is the information content of diffstats to
> distinguish definition changes from implementation development.

I go the other way style wise, but agree it doesn't really matter for
local headers included from few other files.  Adding a above to
comment will at least avoid anyone else (or forgetful me) raising question on v3.

Jonathan